On Wed, 2003-12-31 at 07:47, Davy Brion wrote: > compared to RH9 there's not a lot of difference, except that practically > everything is of a more recent version than in RH9. Stability is the > same, quality is IMO the same (but then again, how do you measure > quality?) and there are some nice improvements like yum. > > overall i'd say FC1 is better than RH9. It's just too bad so many > incorrect statements have been made on certain sites (*cough* > slashdot/osnews *cough*) about Fedora. I would agree with all this. I went from RH9 to FC1 and have generally found things to be as good or better. I will say that my start was a bit rocky as upgrading from RH9 was a bit painful and didn't go as smoothly as I would have thought because of some Ximian Evo stuff I had installed and some other random RH9->FC1 hiccups. I ended up doing a clean install and things went better the second time around. Still some issues getting up2date working, which everyone seems to have a problem with, but most of that is sorted out (and actually yum eliminates a lot of need for it anyway). I do agree with some of the criticism that is leveled at FC1 (and RH in general) regarding including standard add-ons that it doesn't today. Why can't they distribute the Sun JRE/JDK, Macromedia Flash, etc., and just have it all working out of the box? Yes, I know it isn't open source, but if everybody just installs it all anyway and everybody bumps their foot on the same patches of rough ground, what's the point? I'm not a purist when it comes to open source. Yes, I generally like having source available, but there are some things where that isn't possible (yet! ;-), so suck it up and move on in the mean time. I do understand the lack of some things where there are legal issues involved (MP3 is a notable point). Anyway, I have not used SuSE before, but have used Mandrake, etc. I generally prefer RH because it has the broadest industry support. If somebody does anything for Linux, there will always be RH/FC rpms available. The other distros will have more spotty support, possibly forcing you to recompile from source every time. Some people like that and generally do it all the time. I tend to prefer binary rpms where possible. I have found FC1 hardware compatibility to be very good. My rig is pretty standard. The only thing lacking right now is a good ethernet driver for the onboard ethernet on my NVidia NForce 2 mobo, but from what I can tell the community at large is still getting that driver in shape and so it doesn't look like any other distro has better support. Anyway, I'd give it a B in terms of the initial install if you're upgrading from RH9, and an A- thereafter (the "-" for the up2date issues). -- Dave -- Dave Roberts <ldave@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
